Chris Pereira: ''Rayman Legends was, for myself and many others, a major reason to pick up a Wii U early on. Although it was known more than a month in advance of the system's launch that Legends would be coming in the first quarter of 2013, rather than in November as originally planned, it had been a game touted as a Wii U exclusive for some time. It seemed inevitable that it would eventually come to other platforms, but it would still be something that could only be had on Wii U for a period of time, and it would only be on Wii U that you could take advantage of the GamePad-specific features.

With the beginning of 2013 being so barren for Wii U releases that Nintendo president Satoru Iwata recently apologized for the drought, Legends would have been an even more welcome sight on store shelves. Much to the chagrin of Wii U owners everywhere, Ubisoft yesterday announced the game would not be coming out on February 26, as it was said to be even in recent weeks, but would instead be coming in September -- alongside Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 versions.''

ermmm no, the reason the Wii-U fans feel let down is we were promised this on 1st of March, just 2 weeks away from release and bam, Ubisoft goes and snatches it away from us to delay it another 6 months. To add insult to injury, the game went gold a while back and is ready to sell. So why hold it back from us who were eagerly awaiting this?

""Titles for Xbox 360 must ship at least simultaneously with other video game platform, and must have at least feature and content parity on-disc with the other video game platform versions in all regions where the title is available. If these conditions are not met, Microsoft reserves the right to not allow the content to be released on Xbox 360.""

"Microsoft reserves the right to not allow the content to be released on Xbox 360"

Reserves the right means that Microsoft could have said yes and Ubisoft could have released the game first on the Wii U then the 360 and the PS3. But since they said NO Ubisoft has decided to delay the games release on the Wii U so that it could come out for the 360 later on in the year.

Yes MS has policy but Ubisoft could've went a head as planed ,but they decided to a for go extra expenses of added Content it would require to be put on Xbox after having been released on other platforms before them. So all in all the choice & blame is Ubisoft for not wanting to invest more into the game at a later date.

The part that angers me about M$'s policy is not that they have it......they're a company and they have the right to make any policy they please......it's that developers actually abide that policy and allow themselves to be strong armed into not developing a game as good as it can be for each particular platform.

The game developers hold the power, not the console manufacturers. It's been well know since like the NES era that the console makers make all their money on software sales, not the other way around. If developers just said "no, we don't care about your policy, we develop as well as we can for each platform, if you don't like it, you don't have to have our game on your platform, and you don't have to make any money from it.", which some devs with high profile games have done this gen and MS didn't ban those games (Dragon Age Origins, Batman AA, even surprisngly Epic with Unreal Tournament 3, and many others), what could M$ do?......close up shop? lol......platforms need devs more than devs need platforms since there are plenty of platforms. But you've gotta be able to be a big developer with a big game to be able to call a HUGE company like MicroSoft's bluff in a situation like this.

This generation, because of Micro$oft's platform parity policy is the very first generation in console history that dvelopers aren't specifically developing games to each platform's strengths. I notice MS wasn't acting like Hitler when it comes to platform parity last gen when Xbox games versions of games looked a generation ahead of PS2 versions. They knew even back then that they couldn't beat Sony on an even playing field, so for the next gen they made this policy to screw Sony. No matter how much more powerfull Sony's hardware....gamers will never know it on cross-platform games. And it worked. Developers allowed themselves to be strong-armed by MS, and gamers still to this day are convinced that 360 had the better hardware this gen, all by a little policy paragraph that in reality M$ has no power to actually enforce because if devs aren't putting games in their platform, they won't be in the console business for long.

Agreed, xBASSxMONSTAx. There's absolutely nothing wrong with games going multiplatform - the more people can play a great game, the more chance that sequels and similar projects will be greenlit. It's childish to lash out at games like this (and Devil May Cry IV, for the record) for increasing their market share.

But the delay is a real kick in the teeth, especially since many Wii U owners (myself included) were excited about this and bought the console partly on the promise of it being a LAUNCH title.

Agreed. I don't really care about it going multi platform. However, I am very angry that because of Microsoft's policy the game is being delayed 7 more months. I was already disappointed that it couldn't launch with the system.

Ubisoft should have waited until the Wii U version released, then spoken to Microsoft and Sony about a port. That could have solved everything.

I almost want to cancel my order. But I won't, because those developers have really worked hard, and why should I let Microsoft's immature policy discourage me from getting this amazing looking game that has been long since paid off at gamestop.

Microsoft's policy is once that says that if a multiplatform game doesn't release on the xbox platform on the same day, then they won't allow that game to be on their system. In addition, companies are not allowed to make games that take advantage of better hardware(Though Wii U might be exempt from this part because it isn't in the same generation).

Let me explain. Now, the Wii U has no games. Rayman was the first game people were actually looking forward to. Three reasons for anger:

1. Still no games to play 2. Delayed for seven months for no reason (no Wii U related reason anyway) 3. September is already a full month for releases which means gamers won't have the time and/or money to play it Bonus reason: Some sympathetic gamers are angry about how Ubisoft is treating their devs.

I totally understand why Wii-U owners are pissed, but while they're at it there is no additional harm in releasing a Vita version. I loved Origins on my OLED screen with clever pinch-zoom function and no loss of graphical fidelity, it was an excellent port of an awesome platformer.

Yes I am aware of that, which is why I began with saying I totally understand why Wii-U owners are pissed (off)...

The Vita version would potentially be the most faithful port of the Wii-U version given its touch screen inputs, and I wouldn't need to give those features up by playing it on my PS3 instead. Fingers crossed! :-D

i dont see the big deal really...its a little disappointing but its a great game coming to wiiu and the wiiu version will be superior....nintendo just need to get out their own games on time and bring them all out this year and next.

microsoft ruined this generation . first they make devs hold back their content to please the xbox360 with equal content (bluray>) and now they are holding back games from everyone else. I hate the xbox and hope it fails miserably next generation!